Skip to main content
Glama

CiteStamp

by com.citestamp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

What refutes

what_refutes
Read-onlyIdempotent

Edges asserting or indicating that something REFUTES the given work or claim.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum edges to return per tier (default 100, max 1000). Well-cited works have thousands; the response reports has_more and inferred_total so you can tell a page from the whole answer.
offsetNoHow many edges to skip, for paging. Advance by the LIMIT you asked for, not by the number of results you got back — duplicates are removed after the window is taken, so a page can return fewer rows than it consumed. Keep going while has_more is true.
identifierYesDOI, arXiv id, OpenAlex id, or internal claim id
asserted_onlyNoIf true, restrict to human-signed (asserted) edges. If false (default), return both asserted and machine-inferred edges.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 100,
+  "description": "Maximum edges to return per tier (default 100, max 1000). Well-cited works have thousands; the response reports has_more and inferred_total so you can tell a page from the whole answer.",
+  "maximum": 1000,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "How many edges to skip, for paging. Advance by the LIMIT you asked for, not by the number of results you got back — duplicates are removed after the window is taken, so a page can return fewer rows than it consumed. Keep going while has_more is true.",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already mark the operation read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by signaling that results include both human-asserted and machine-inferred edges ('asserting or indicating'), which maps to the asserted_only parameter. It does not address edge cases like empty results or rate limits, but those are less critical given the schema's paging details.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the tool's core purpose with no filler or repetition of schema details. It earns its place and is easy to scan.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only edge query, the description plus the exhaustive schema is nearly complete. There is no output schema, so the return edge shape is not detailed, but parameter descriptions already mention has_more and inferred_total, covering the key paging behavior an agent needs.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented with types, defaults, and constraints. The description only reinforces that the identifier refers to a 'work or claim', adding little beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description names a specific resource ('edges') and a specific relation ('REFUTES'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It naturally contrasts with sibling what_supports, so an agent can distinguish them without opening schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'asserting or indicating that something REFUTES the given work or claim' tells an agent exactly when to use this tool: when looking for refuting evidence. It does not explicitly name alternatives like what_supports or what_cites, but the relation-based semantics makes the selection context clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All CiteStamp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources